Quote

Monday, March 19, 2007

The media are finally catching up with Al Gore. Criticism of his anti-global-warming franchise and his personal environmental record has gone beyond ankle-biting bloggers. It's now coming from the New York Times and the Nashville Tennessean, his hometown paper that put his birth, as a senator's son, on its front page back in 1948, and where a young Al Gore Jr. worked for five years as a journalist.

Last Tuesday, the Times reported that several eminent scientists "argue that some of Mr. Gore's central points [on global warming] are exaggerated and erroneous." The Tenessean reported yesterday that Mr. Gore received $570,000 in royalties from the owners of zinc mines who held mineral leases on his farm. The mines, which closed in 2003 but are scheduled to reopen under a new operator later this year, "emitted thousands of pounds of toxic substances and several times, the water discharged from the mines into nearby rivers had levels of toxins above what was legal."Mr. Gore has called the campaign to combat global warming a "moral imperative." But Mr. Gore faces another imperative: to square his sales pitches with the facts and his personal lifestyle to more align with what he advocates that others practice. "Are you ready to change the way you live?" asks Mr. Gore's film. It's time people ask Mr. Gore "Are you ready to change the way you live, as well as the way you lecture the rest of us?"

I'm not sure this "correction" appearing in this morning's Roanoke Times is correct:

Correction

Friday's editorial, "An unsatisfactory job performance," misstated the inexperience of Roanoke's teaching staff. It should have stated 60 percent of new teachers have two years or fewer experience. (link) [my emphasis]

By definition, don't 100% of new teachers have "two years or fewer" experience? Just asking.

You'd think, with the thousands and thousands of gun laws we now have in this country, that, if they were accomplishing that which was intended, we'd be seeing a dramatic decline in the rate of violent crime. But no. Just the opposite is true. It's on the rise.A thinking man might say: It's time to try something different. Gun control laws have failed.Well, I don't know if these geniuses are thinking, but they are prepared to try something different.Bullet control.

Guns Aren't Enough - Pols Want Bullet ControlBy Dan Kadison, The New York PostMarch 19, 2007 -- Getting guns off the street is not enough to stop violent crime, a group of lawmakers said yesterday.

You have to stop the bullets, too.

"For far too long we have ignored the relationship between bullets and gun crimes," state Sen. Eric Adams (D-Brooklyn), a former NYPD captain, said as he held a hollow-point slug. "We can no longer allow this item, this bullet, to be that silent partner."

Adams said he was introducing legislation that would mandate the tracking of ammunition and force buyers to register the bullets they purchase. (link)

Adams might as well mandate that bullets disintegrate upon impact too. That's as reasonable, under current circumstances, seeing as how his requirement is impossible for manufacturers to meet, as tracking a .22 shell after it leaves the barrel of a gun.Earth to former NYPD captain.When will these guys ever learn? Guns - and lead projectiles - don't kill people, people ...

Global warming is the oil companies' fault. We all know that. But we didn't know, until now, just how fully.It turns out, Big Oil is melting the glaciers so their freighters can get through the Arctic Ocean more easily. The bastards:

Global Warming Oil BoonReutersMarch 19, 2007 -- Hanover, N.H. - Global warming, blamed for melting polar bears' icy Arctic habitat, could be a boon to the shipping and oil industries in the far north, according to a new report.

The dramatic decrease in sea ice above the Arctic Circle means that formerly impenetrable shipping routes are now open or soon could be for much of the year, the U.S. Arctic Research Commission wrote in a report released last week at an Arctic-scientist summit in Hanover.

Beyond shipping, less sea ice means easier access for offshore oil exploration and drilling in the Arctic, which is thought to contain about 25 percent of the world's remaining oil and gas reserves, the report said. (link)

I knew Big Oil was behind this. We all did. Where's Crazy Al? Off with their heads.

A contributor to this morning's New York Times is "stunned" over the fact that conservatives are antipathetic to John McCain's candidacy for president. He shouldn't be.

The column:

A One-Man Civil WarBy Matthew Continetti, writing in the New York Times

Call me crazy, but I wasn’t expecting the crowd at the recent Conservative Political Action Conference here to devote its most passionate boos to Senator John McCain of Arizona, a conservative himself and the Republican establishment’s choice for the 2008 Republican presidential nomination. But boo it did.

The right’s ambivalence, even antagonism, toward the McCain candidacy is stunning. And it is responsible for all the talk these days of a looming conservative crisis. (link)

There is plenty of talk these days, to be sure. Mostly in establishment Republican circles. The Bob Dole/John Warner wing. They just can't figure out how it is that a "solid conservative" like McCain could be so reviled by those of us on the right. He is, after all, a war hero. And he opposes ear marks.

If only that was the extent of it.

Off the top of my head:

● John McCain opposes drilling for oil in remote and desolate corners of Alaska

● John McCain raised and promoted the deceit known as the "gun show loophole."

● John McCain opposed President Bush's tax cuts. Twice. The tax cuts that have propelled the economy to new heights in recent years.

● John McCain favors restrictions on smokers and higher taxes on cigarettes.

● John McCain leads the charge toward amnesty - and citizenship - for 12 million illegals in this country. He even favors allowing foreign lawbreakers living here to draw from Social Security. ● John McCain has bought into the trendy global warming nonsense and advocates government solutions to the non-problem.

● McCain/Feingold.

● And, yes, there is McCain's disturbing inclination to pander to the mainstream press. His trashing of the religious right as being "agents of intolerance" was unforgivable.To me, the problem John McCain presents is similar to that which Bill Clinton brought us. Neither is grounded in principle beyond the notion that their role in life is to focus on America's troubles and legislate them away. Both believe in the power of government. The be all, end all.

McCain will tell you he supports the Second Amendment but he's prepared to throw gun owners over the side if he perceives the need to crack down on gun show transactions. He will tell you he champions our freedom of speech, but created - and got passed - the most egregious assault on 1st Amendment rights in my lifetime. McCain/Feingold. On and on.There is no mystery here. John McCain, most times, talks the talk. But too often he walks ... away.

New York (AP) -- Fights between fans during a championship high school basketball game at Madison Square Garden turned into a melee that spilled into the streets and subways, drawing police on horseback and in riot gear.

For whatever reason, I'd never watched the movie, Liar Liar, until this past Saturday evening on TV.I have to tell you, I can't think of another flick, of the hundreds that I've watched over the years, that has had a leading character that was more annoying.Jim Carrey, who I thought did a good job in Bruce Almighty, reverted to the irritating persona he perfected in In Living Color, a role for which he should have been imprisoned, he was so annoying.In Liar Liar, it seemed most of Carrey's lines were shouted. And those that weren't shouted, were screamed. Way over the top. Distractingly so.Which made for, in itself, an awful movie.As Ebert & Roper might put it: Three thumbs down.